Early Ford V-8 Club Forum

EFV-8 Club Forum / 1940 Ford Discussion / oil filter

Reply to Discussion | New Discussion << previous || next >>

Posted By Discussion Topic: oil filter -- page: 1 2 3     gil 11-29-2010 @ 11:06 AM reply profile send p.m. Member Posts: 2 Joined: Nov 2010 kubes40 Can you send me the pictures you refer to in this article. Also, where would be a good source for replacement hoses? I have the canister but the hoses have dry roted. My e-mail address is ggodfrey@bellsouth.net Gil kubes40 11-29-2010 @ 11:44 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 The pictures are (hopefully attached to this response. If they don;t show up, I'll send them directly to you. I need to learn how to attach stuff here! The hoses (correct type) can be found on ebay on occasion. The correct hose has long been obsolete so finding it at your local hydraulic hose manufacturer will be fruitless. kubes40 11-29-2010 @ 11:50 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 Hey Tom, Thanks for the tips on how to install images. I'm thrilled! Here's the second one with the fittings... gil 11-30-2010 @ 5:59 AM reply profile send p.m. Member Posts: 2 Joined: Nov 2010 I got the pictures. Many thanks. Gil TomO 11-30-2010 @ 7:12 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 7243 Joined: Oct 2009 Mike, you are welcome. I notice that you refer to the return hose going to the fuel pump stand. There was a letter sent out in 1940 to change the routing to the distributer location on all cars, due to oil leaks at the fuel pump stand location, so most 1940 cars had the distributer location even if they were built before the change over date. I don't have the date of the letter as I donated all of my 1940 letters to the Foundation. Gil, the hoses are not being reproduced and most of the original and replacements are dry rotted or so old that they would be unreliable for any car except a trailer queen. I have the complete set up for a 1940 car sitting in a box, because I drive my car. The oil filter was an option in 1940 and IMHO is not necessary if you change your oil frequently. I drive my car about 1500 -2000 miles a year and change the oil at 1,000 miles and every fall. If you want to install a filter, you will have to find a way to un-crimp the fittings from your hoses and then re-crimp them onto modern hoses. I checked into having hoses made in the late 1980's and was told by several hydraulic hose supply companies that their equipment could not handle that type of hose. Imperial Brass (the company that made the original fittings) was still in business at the time and I asked an engineer at the company if they still had any of the equipment or if there were replacement fittings available and the answer was no. Tom This message was edited by TomO on 11-30-10 @ 7:21 AM kubes40 12-01-2010 @ 8:35 AM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 Hi Tom, The letter you speak of was produced in May, 1940. There will of course be some latitude as to exactly when each car got the early or late routing applied. We will never know when the car was built (exactly) nor when it was finally delivered to the consumer. I had to make a tough decision when I started researching and writing the '40 book. That decision (reached)was to provide the reader with the best and most detailed information available. That will include what Ford INTENDED / DESIGNED to build and subsequently supply to the consumer. There has to be a standard applied (in my opinion) when it comes to having our cars judged. Otherwise, it is easy to apply a near 'anything goes' on the concourse. Remember please that our cars are judged as to how they were delivered. If a part was not available at the time of delivery, it simply should not be allowed as correct. Even though it may have been retrofitted, it remains not AS DELIVERED. We all realize that should a certain cadmium plated bolt run short one day, a raven finish bolt would have been installed. That's reality. However, the cadmium bolt was INTENDED so (again, my opinion) the cadmium bolt should be the only acceptable one on the concourse. Things like the oil line routing are a bit dicier in that we can't pin down exactly when the change took place in the 'real world'. We know when the letters were sent out. We do not know when the various plants / dealers received that letter. Nor do we know when the letter was read and / or when compliance became a reality. In this example we can (once again, my opinion) offer a little 'room' upon the concourse. However, to think that an early car (let's say, February) got the late routing... NO WAY. There are other glaring ambiguities that no doubt will need to be dealt with by the JSC at some point in the future. One ambiguity that comes to mind is the fact that single side whitewalls were not available until VERY LATE in production. This is a non-refutable fact. Yet, I have never observed a '40 with double whites. Another (lesser) FACT is the outside 'swan neck' mirrors were not available as a pair until nearly May, 1940. In other words, NO right hand mirror could have been installed on a car delivered prior to May, 1940. Yet, one sees more 'dual mirror' cars than not. The list goes on and on...hopefully, many will appreciate why I chose to write what was designed / intended vs. what 'may have happened..." respectfully, Mike "Kube" Kubarth ford38v8 12-01-2010 @ 4:39 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 2736 Joined: Oct 2009 Mike, If I understand what you wrote, I'm afraid that the application of your theory on what Ford intended will run into some hard criticism when the book is published. What actually made it out of the showroom in multiple locations can in no way come close to what Ford intended, if, for no other reason, the lack of certain materials, the misunderstanding of instructions, and indeed, the intentional substitution of parts for whatever reason. This is not to say that "anything goes" on the Concourse, but you must remember what we've learned: "Never say Never" when describing what Ford put out the door. With regard to factory letters and when a running change was actually made, there is, in addition to an expected lag in compliance to a letter, the likelihood that certain changes became fact before any company-wide paperwork was generated. There were, as you know, limited trial runs for delivery to Detroit area dealerships, to expedite engineering review should failures result. It is logical also to assume that similar events may have occurred at outlying assembly locations, as of course, there are more than one way to skin a cat, and some plants did in fact have difficulty with methods as done at the Rouge. While a Purist will lament the fact that most Concourse cars have whitewall tires, and many Standards have been upgraded to DeLuxe, if the options were available at the time, they will be on the Concourse today because that's what people like today. Also, speaking as a Master Judge, I have never seen a serial number compared to so called "early" or "late" options on the Concourse. There is, you know, the usual directive to not "kill the car" being judged, so, I for one would respectively hope that your book contain the words "May have" more often than the word "Never". Alan kubes40 12-01-2010 @ 7:14 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 3370 Joined: Oct 2009 Alan, you make valid points. Points that I understand fully. One will NOT see the words 'always' or 'never' in the book I am working on. I will hazard to express my opinion that I am probably more keenly aware of what happened in the day to day builds of our cars and what surrounded those happenings than most. And, while I agree in theory with 'don't kill the car', when something is known to be fact, and that 'something' is wrong on a particular vehicle, a deduction should be taken. Period. Your example given about single whitewalls being an option at the time...the problem is they were NOT an option at the time for perhaps 90% of the 40's built. Do you still believe just because guys like them, no deduction should be taken? Yes, allow some leeway for build and delivery time frames - absolutely. However, a car with early ash trays, January glass, etc. most likely did not sit in a showroom until May and THEN have the tires swapped for single whitewalls. Bumpers without ribs on the back? Radiator hoses with markings? Five rib spark plugs? Wrong. Period. these are things we KNOW. There is no leeway. If those cars are allowed the same points as a car with the correct parts, then what's the point of attempting to restore a car properly? Personally, I spend a lot of time and a lot of money making certain my restorations stand out in terms of both accuracy and quality. The theory that it takes twice as much time and money to do a 999 point car as it does to do a 950 point car is quite true from my experience. I'm willing to bet that anyone that has personally done such a restoration (999) will agree with that formula. Many guys choose not to spend the 'twice' to achieve the 999 and that's perfectly fine. It is a choice we are all faced with. If the vehicle with numerous KNOWN inaccuracies shall receive the (nearly) same score as the one that has gone through that extra effort required to be as accurate as (known)possible, then why would anyone continue to make that extra effort? Respectfully, Mike Kubarth Lincoln 12-01-2010 @ 7:58 PM reply profile send p.m. Member Posts: 56 Joined: Oct 2009 1.Oil filter instructions which was posted/attached 11-29-2010 was released in Sept. per a 9/4/40 Service Tips Letter (Edgewater Branch).Lists oil return hose as being 25" long. (no length given for supply hose).All production units receiving 01A-18658-A oil filter assemblies were equipped per 01A-18683 instructions to reroute return oil line to distributor drain. Does anyone know length of supply hose used in 01A-18683? 2.The 01A-18658-A filter assembly continued for both production & service, until stock was depleted, and was to be replaced by 11A-18658-A assembly per a 5/23/41 Service-Tips Letter. 11A-18658-A had steel oil lines. 3.Mike: Did you get any installation instructions with your NOS in-the-box 01A-18658 oil filter assembly? For everyone's info:Service Letter releases indicates the filter housing itself had 7 narrow reinforcing at bottom of housing. This appears to match your housing. The inlet boss connection on the 01A housing was changed about March 1946 to a more near-the-top location per a FRAM 1/7/46 FILTER instruction sheet for the flexible-hose equipped (except 60 HP)V-8 engines. The 01A designated filter housing "apparently" was used until about June 1946 when, among other changes, the housing was changed to 4 reinforcing ribs at the bottom to reduce oil leakage due to the higher 80# oil pressures in later engines. 4.Also for what it is worth,a 10/29/40 Cleveland Service Letter mentioned that production engines were being furnished with the 3 studs, used for the oil filter assembly, as being set 1/16" higher in the cylinder block to allow for proper nut assembly when filter housing was installed. (this "may or may not" have caught some 1940 engines in production) 5.On the attachment showing oil fittings,would presume the early 40 was shown to the left,while the late 40 was to the right. If so, what is the stud-like fitting for, shown near the top? Could it be the drain stud 51-18670 as used with the early 40 filters? It just looks "different". ford38v8 12-01-2010 @ 8:26 PM reply profile send p.m. Senior Posts: 2736 Joined: Oct 2009 Mike, I agree with all you said but no, I made no mention of the double whitewall issue, only whitewalls in general, as although whites were available except for '46, they were not popular back in the day: Even open cars had blacks, and were advertised that way. While there are excellent repop bumpers available today, they are not correct without the rib, and in my book should have a deduction. Even if original bumpers were not available at any price (which is not the case), a repop could be modified to show a rib to gain the nod of a Judge. Our Concourse today is not guilty of the charge of political awards as some Concourses have always been. We all know that people are fallible and Judges are people, but a car must stand or fall on its own merit, not on who built it. I have and will continue to call it like I see it, as I believe to do otherwise would be to do harm to those who deserve the high point judging sheet. I do not think this is at issue with the statement "don't kill the car", even though the term implies a degree of leniency. Alan

<< previous || next >>

PAGE: 1 2 3

NOTE: YOU MUST BE A REGISTERED USER AND BE LOGGED IN TO POST (and reply to) messages in this forum. If you are a first time user, please click the CREATE A NEW ACCOUNT in the masthead above to register and Log In. After that, all you do is LOG IN to enjoy using this site.

DISCLAIMER: The V-8 Club does no independent testing of any of the opinions, thoughts or suggestions presented in the website on the Forum, in the Tech Tips section, or any section. A reader should consider the website to be a forum wherein differing solutions to a particular set of circumstances may be discussed. Ultimately, the selection of an item for an individual's vehicle must be based upon the independent study of the vehicle owner in consultation with people in the hobby and restoration experts.

EFV-8 Club Forum Home | Back to Home Page | Contact the Webmaster

Copyright © 2009 - EFV-8.org
Powered by < CF FORUM > v.2.1